The Jewish-Israeli navel-gazers

The latest outrage, a video recording of an Israeli army medic (!) casually executing a Palestinian man, has been seized upon by people who are sympathetic to Israel. They quickly began to write things like: What have we become? What about our values? This fight is about the battle over the soul of the “Jewish state.” And remarkably: Thanks to the dead Palestinian for forcing us to face what we’ve become.

As usual, the real victims – like the man whose brain is exploded in the video, or the young girl in the other video, or the black guy in the lynch video – get lost in the solipsistic mix. It’s as if the Jewish-Israeli navel has projected itself four feet outwards before flexing back, splitting in two, and glomming onto Jewish-Israeli eyeballs.

Small wonder they can only see one small piece of what they actually are. Of what the whole picture is.

It’s normal for members of a community – imagined or not – to attend to the facts and stories of their daily lives and the lives of people who are like them. The broadening and fragmentation of the media landscape enables and encourages the phenomenon. Sites like this one even help drive the development of new communities.

Yet, one consistent and durable criticism of the Jewish-Israeli left goes to its bewilderingly myopic perspective. It’s not so much an inability to see other people. Rather, it’s the tendency to see others as objects (or rarely, agents), situated within a narrative of self. A preening egoism adorns every “humane” pronouncement about the need to end the occupation. Don’t you see? Apartheid undermines the very essence of our whatever and etc…

Fine, one group of people is painfully self-involved and grandiose. Why is that important?

In other circumstances it wouldn’t matter: like a whole culture dedicated to bathroom selfies. But in the apartheid context it matters a lot. The dehumanization of other people occurs through the extraordinary status we afford ourselves or through the denigration of others. For the Jewish-Israeli left it’s the former, for the right it’s both.

The truth of course, is that there’s nothing exceptional about Jewish-Israelis, or Palestinians for that matter. God didn’t choose anyone, and Palestine/Israel is one more ugly mess in a world that’s seen thousands of them at least. Ethnic conflict is ordinary and the Banality of Evil is as persistent a truism as any other. Even, apartheid, the chosen government of the Jewish-Israeli people, isn’t very exceptional. It’s only very offensive.

The whole claim of religious or secular exceptionalism (so many Nobel prizes, after all) informs apartheid and justifies it. Even a high-minded theory of exceptionalism will always lead to a striking lack of self-awareness and sense of superiority in the best of cases. In Palestine, it’s the source of our daily calamity.

My unsolicited (and likely unheeded) advice to “liberal” Jewish-Israelis is to forget about being exceptional, either as people or as a people. Approach your role in apartheid from the perspective of someone who believes in true equality. When a Palestinian is executed by a racist – a true exceptionalist – in your midst, don’t worry about how it’ll make you look. Don’t ask what the murder means for “Jewish morality.” Instead ask things like, What was the dead guy’s favorite football team? Did he play a musical instrument? What was his favorite memory?

About Ahmed Moor

Ahmed Moor is a Palestinian-American who was born in the Gaza
Strip. He is a PD Soros Fellow, co-editor of After Zionism and co-founder and CEO of liwwa.com.
Twitter: @ahmedmoor

Posted In:

55 Responses

“Small wonder they can only see one small piece of what they actually are. Of what the whole picture is.”

There is a story I recall (can’t remember if I read it or heard about it) some decades ago about two Israeli soldiers during the ’48 war. They take an Arab fighter prisoner and while on their way to their base argue about his fate. One soldier wants to execute him outright while the other says that would be wrong. The whole story then becomes a foray into how these two men explore their, and the Jewish people’s, humanity or lack thereof. Meanwhile during all this discussion the Arab guy says not a word. It’s as if he is only there to provide a catalyst for the soldiers, an excuse to talk about everything else except where he fits into these two men’s universes. In the end his fate is not really THAT important.

The American public is right up there in the running. Look how popular Bernie Sanders’ rhetoric about equality and human rights is with so-called progressives. Yet they only apply such considerations to Americans (themselves), with no thought for the barbaric, murderous rampages of our empire. With all this talk about a “revolutionary” change in our politics, there is very little talk on the Left about ending our criminal enterprises around the globe. Sanders wants to continue our drone assassination program, and he fully supports the carnage we have unleashed on Yemen. (Yes, that’s us doing that by proxy through the Saudis.)

How many “liberals” are willing to point this out, or are even willing to hear it? When I comment on the facts of Sanders’ support for our imperialistic crimes on alternative media sites I am often reviled and attacked as a Sanders basher. Any reality that doesn’t affect themselves is considered irrelevant. U.S. society is a poster child for exceptionalism.

. as if Palestinians would ever take advice from these supposedly
‘unaware’ minions of “liberal” (not centrist mind you) zionists about what to do, think or negotiate from 67 on. I think your problem is not what you wrote above which makes sense if what you believe in your mind about liberal zionists is something you can’t let go of. the problem is you have such misguided, warped and convoluted knowledge about what a liberal and/or left wing zionist is versus a true zionist-hater/israel hater that you confuse the two. you do realize that the gideon levys’s of israel represent less then a 10th of a% of the population. that the organized resistance against Israel has been trying for a long time without serious results to separate Zionists into the ‘evil’ center to right while implying there may still be some kind of ‘redemption’ for the confused and gut-wrenched left–but only if they see the light of anti-zionism and all that implies.

Also, your fixation with what you think is exceptionalism is your problem, not Israel’s. It isn’t as if all the major Judaic born faiths don’t all feel they are the most superior extension of the religion. Any two-bit religious scholar can tell you that the so called covenant the Jews took on had little to do with being superior too shoddy and being the ones who chose would bring much hardship and suffering. There were rules and rules broken but what religion doesn’t have them. You possess the most narrow minded and typical bigoted understanding of what the phrase “chosen people” means.

Anyway, as long as Palestinian supporters(from u’s. Campus to Gaza , and yesterday Abbas said it in a speech,) continue to say that “all of palestine is “occupied”. And by all they mean the catchy little chant – from the river to sea…. So, what does it matter what some left-wing Zionist thinks and what’s left to negotiate

Da Bakr is absolutely right: 1. No wing of Zionism, no matter the rhetoric, has a program different from that of the Kahanes and Goldmans. 2. Those Meistervolk citizens who oppose (forget fight against) Zionism are, not <10% as he says, but even rarer.

All the deluded ones here who expect anything to change in fact, i.e. for the Palestinian owners of the country, thanks to any "left-wing Zionists" would be more effective lighting candles to Saint Nicholas or something. The "left wing" is the folks who brought us the invasion, the Illegal Partition, the Nakba, the military rule, and four major wars of aggression –two of them still continuing.

if you think da bakr is “absolutely right” can you please cite what admed moor wrote reflecting his so called ‘confusion’. what did moor write that you think warrants this criticism:

the problem is you have such misguided, warped and convoluted knowledge about what a liberal and/or left wing zionist is versus a true zionist-hater/israel hater that you confuse the two.

and please quote him (moor that is). unless of course you are excluding the target of bakr’s diatribe as one of your “All the deluded ones here” — as if you (absurdly) think you are the better judge of zionists than a palestinian from gaza, or any of us (non zionists) here for that matter.

I can only repeat that De Bakr is absolutely right as to two points in his post that I interpreted as follows:

1. No wing of Zionism, no matter the rhetoric, has a program different from that of the Kahanes and Goldmans. 2. Those Meistervolk citizens who oppose (forget fight against) Zionism are, not <10% as he says, but even rarer.

I don’t care for the words he uses, and after I wrote my interpretation of it there is no sense in asking me to confirm his own words, instead of my reading of it. It doesn’t make any sense to put in discussion whatever Ahmed Moor wrote or didn’t write: obviously he was drawing distinctions among Zionists in his article , but not as the main point of it.
As for “better judge than…”, that is nonsense. I still have to see any evidence of any difference between Zionists as far as the result felt by Palestinians is concerned, over some 100 years. Of course I know you disagree.

Echinococcus, you make some good points and/or keep folks honest, but you’re not omniscient and simply do NOT know the future with the absolute certainty you espouse. There are many complex dynamics in play here, any of which, singly or collectively, could substantially alter outcome(s) in a heartbeat.

And more today than there were yesterday. I think this issue is entering a highly unstable time. There’s a LOT of “new” (eg. awareness, common purpose, rhetorical burden shifting …) happening such that none of us know ultimate effect. Could be nothing. Could be everything.

But saying it WILL NOT have effect is actively and aggressively advocating the former (which is pretty much one of Sibiriak’s comments yesterday).

It doesn’t make any sense to put in discussion whatever Ahmed Moor wrote or didn’t write: obviously he was drawing distinctions among Zionists in his article , but not as the main point of it.

actually it makes a lot of sense. you should try engaging with his article instead of prioritizing hammering everyone about how deluded you think everyone is — except yourself that is. this penchant for picking isolated phrases out of their context to make the same point over and over again — i think you’re missing the forest for the trees. and moor is so much more interesting than bakr:

Yet, one consistent and durable criticism of the Jewish-Israeli left goes to its bewilderingly myopic perspective. It’s not so much an inability to see other people. Rather, it’s the tendency to see others as objects (or rarely, agents), situated within a narrative of self. A preening egoism adorns every “humane” pronouncement about the need to end the occupation. Don’t you see? Apartheid undermines the very essence of our whatever and etc…

Fine, one group of people is painfully self-involved and grandiose. Why is that important?

I still have to see any evidence of any difference between Zionists as far as the result felt by Palestinians is concerned, over some 100 years. Of course I know you disagree.

because of course you know me better than i know myself no doubt. you being so smart and all.

It sounds a bit childish as an argument. Of course this was not about Moor’s article, which is very much to the point and does not, in fact, call on any delusion of a “left wing” Zionism etc., but De Bakr’s going off the rails with a couple relevant observations.
That said, both Ritzl and Annie have a point in that many things keep changing –without, however, affecting the facts so far. Only the words and labels. Basing any kind of action on those would be crazy. And yes, Annie is right; I do keep harping on the same very few essentials. All of us do –about things that we consider essential.

The banality of evil, indeed, but it is important for those outside this banality to call attention to it — and to call it by its name, “evil”. If some of the perps are, like all perps, I suppose, too self-involved to see it, the worse for them.

Yesterday I spent several hours walking through a mostly-Hispanic neighborhood in Brooklyn, canvassing Democratic voters about their likelihood of voting for Sanders (or, of course, for Clinton). And often I thought about all the people who probably thought about the Democratic Party as a party “of the people” and hadn’t noticed what it had become under Bill Clinton and Obama and others, people who dimly recalled FDR and felt comfortable “being” Democrats (perhaps as Israeli-Jews feel comfortable “being Jews”) without noticing that what they were busy “being” was a far cry from what Democrats were in the 1940s, 1950s. Or maybe mine is a false nostalgia or resulting from listening too exclusively to what my parents told me. Maybe nothing has changed. For Democrats. And maybe Jews were ever thus.

This is such a great article and goes directly to the heart of so-called “liberal zzz’s” who go from “oh that’s horrible” to “what does this say about me” in about a nanosecond. Who cares about you? It seems that a lot of so-called liberals suffer from short attention span and narcissism I think is part and parcel of white privilege. So many causes, so little time!

hophmi: You don’t even know whether he is a Muslim or not, but if you look hard enough for an excuse not to take seriously what he is saying you’ll certainly find one.

The self-absorption of the “liberal Zionist” is not his personal characteristic but a product of a whole system designed to sustain collective ethnic self-absorption, with its own process of “education” and socialization, culture and ideology, even a language specially reconstituted for that purpose. In order to become capable of relating to the humanity of a Palestinian or any other Gentile — or even to his own — he must first separate his sense of self from that sustaining environment.

” In order to become capable of relating to the humanity of a Palestinian or any other Gentile — or even to his own — he must first separate his sense of self from that sustaining environment.”

I agree with you completely, “Stephen”.
I will submit however, that to “first separate his sense of self from that sustaining environment” should be pretty easy since that “sustaining environment” exists, in reality only in the LZ’s own head. And it’s most real to him when he is trying to convince somebody else it exists.

“Wonder if Ahmed Moor had ever given this advice to his fellow Muslims”
Straight from the “Whataboutery” section of the Hasbara manual. No attempt to speak about the substance of Ahmed`s remarks. No attempt to outline or explain your disagreement.
So f….ing predictable and so f….ing boring.

Again. This was not a casual execution. The double standards on this website are amazing. On the one hand, according to this website it’s perfectly fine to murder settlers and officers in Judea and Samaria, but when the attempted murderer is killed, THIS is what you take offense with? Guess what, the world isn’t buying it. ANY terrorist that attacks any Jew in Judea and Samaria will die. Here is a great lesson, if you don’t want to be “executed” then don’t try to murder Jews in Judea and Samaria. How about let’s extend that? They time is OVER when Jewish blood is cheap. Anywhere around the world we WILL defend ourselves. This won’t be the last time. I gaurantee you the next time a PLO supremecist tries to murder a Jewish soldier or settler, it will be he himself that dies. This is justice. I pray for this. So should you.

Evidence … thx … Remember an accusation is not evidence and a false accusation is against the basic tenets of Judaism. You wouldn’t make a false accusation would you Ma!?

” … according to this website it’s perfectly fine to murder … officers”

Armed Israelis are valid military targets in Occupied Territories. But you know this already Max. So why do you need to disregard the fact and falsely call it ‘murder’?

” … in Judea and Samaria”

Judea and Samaria were officially re-name the West Bank by the sovereign at the time, Jordan. The present sovereign has not changed it back. It’s called the West Bank Max

” but when the attempted murderer is killed, THIS is what you take offense with?”

A) not a murderer, armed Israelis in Occupied Territories are valid military targets Max. Targeting them is neither murder or terrorism Max
B) no, it’s not what folk tale offense with at all Max, because they were not attempting murder. Armed Israelis in Occupied Territories are valid military targets Max

“ANY terrorist that attacks any Jew in Judea and Samaria will die”

Fine. However, armed Israelis in Occupied Territories are a valid military target Max. It’s not terrorism to attack armed Israelis in Occupied Territories

“Here is a great lesson, if you don’t want to be “executed” then don’t try to murder Jews in Judea and Samaria.

Here is a great lesson Max, armed Israelis in Occupied Territories are a valid military target and it was officially renamed the west Bank by the sovereign at the time Max.

“They time is OVER when Jewish blood is cheap”

Go take your pathetic whining to the Israeli Government, the Zionist Federation and the Jewish Agency who keep sacrificing the blood of Jewish Israeli civilians by encouraging and assisting them to illegally settle in non-Israeli territories held under Israeli Occupation Max.

Why is it that you must purposefully misrepresent Israel’s illegal facts on the ground, purposefully accuse people of terrorism and murder when in fact armed Israelis in non-Israeli territories held under Israeli occupation are valid military targets and why must you purposefully conflate ‘Jews’ with Israelis Max? Are you sick?

Talknic, just scroll your history, you made it very clear that you don’t give a damn if settlers are killed.

Actually just look at your previous comment “Armed Israelis are valid military targets in Occupied Territories”

Answer this question. Beside the fact that these areas are not occupied, in your belief, if a settler carries a handgun for self defense is that man or woman a “valid target” yes or no? plain and simple.

If you say that any father or mother that carries a handgun to protect their family is a valid military target for murder I swear I will never respond to a comment of your again.

Also, answer this one, how would a terrorist know if it was a concealed carry? Murder first and ask questions later?

The Jordanian occupation was illegal and their renaming means nothing under international law.

“If you say that any father or mother that carries a handgun to protect their family is a valid military target for murder I swear I will never respond to a comment of your again. “maxnarr

If that Father and Mother cared about protecting their children’s lives they would not have brought them to a war zone and set up house in illegal squats.If a bank robber gets killed in the act of robbing a bank—a crime—then I could care less if he /she get “Killed”. One less criminal to keep in jail for years.

Would you condemn a illegal settler for shooting a Palestinian Father or Mother for carrying a gun to protect their children from the marauding scum bag squatters you spend your time defending.

Does this mean you will never respond to my comments again.
Just in case you are dithering on that decision , allow me to help you.

If that Father and Mother cared about protecting their children’s lives they would not have brought them to a war zone and set up house in illegal squats.If a bank robber gets killed in the act of robbing a bank—a crime—then I could care less if he /she get “Killed”. One less criminal to keep in jail for years.

Would you condemn a illegal settler for shooting a Palestinian Father or Mother for carrying a gun to protect their children from the marauding scum bag squatters you spend your time defending.

@ MaxNarr “Talknic, just scroll your history, you made it very clear that you don’t give a damn if settlers are killed.”

You’re a stinking liar Max. I’ve always maintained that the Israeli Government and the Zionist Federation are who you should complain to for assisting illegal settlers to settle where they might well become collateral in a war zone. What kind of a scummy organization and criminal Government, apart from those YOU support, purposefully hides behind unarmed civilians, deceiving them into believing they have a right to be there? Illegally selling them land that doesn’t actually belong to the state of Israel?

“Actually just look at your previous comment “Armed Israelis are valid military targets in Occupied Territories””

Uh huh. Note the word “armed”

“Answer this question. Beside the fact that these areas are not occupied”

The UNSC, ICJ and even the Israeli High Court disagree with your bullsh*t Max

” in your belief, if a settler carries a handgun for self defense is that man or woman a “valid target” yes or no? plain and simple.”

You purposefully left out “in Occupied Territories” Max. Tch tch tch, how unsurprisingly dishonest of you

They ought not be in Occupied Territories you dope, let alone armed. The IDF are there to protect them, despite the fact that they’re there in breach of International Law and it’s actually the Occupied who should be protected under Chapter XI of the UN Charter

“If you say that any father or mother that carries a handgun to protect their family is a valid military target for murder I swear I will never respond to a comment of your again”

The best way to protect one’s family Max, is not to illegally settle in other folks territory, where they might become collateral

“Also, answer this one, how would a terrorist know if it was a concealed carry? Murder first and ask questions later?”

The Zionist conjunction, ‘Judaea and Samaria’, suggesting some kind of unit, seems to me to have no Biblical or other ancient authority. Samaria for the most part is the name of a city rather than a region, the capital of the Kingdom of Israel, mainly shown as hostile to that of Judah/Judaea and with a conflicting ideology. The city of Samaria was destroyed twice, once by the Assyrians around 720 and later by the Judaeans around 110.

If you don’t want to see settlers hurt tell them to stay out of Palestine. Tell Netanyahooo that he better start giving a shit about his voters and keep them out of Palestine because the only one who acts like ‘Jewish’ blood is cheap is him and idiots like yourself. Oh, could you possibly join the 21st century or at least move out of your mom’s basement and stop with the my blood’s better ‘n your blood? Blood is blood and Jewish blood isn’t special or any more precious that anyone else’s. It would be awesome if you and the other members of your berakhah pack could grasp that very simple fact.

This execution was captured on video but there’s been countless others. Abed al-Fatah al-Sharif was executed and when the shot was fired, no one was surprised. Seems it was pretty casual and commonplace to me.

Again and again, Marnie and Amigo. You condemn murder. Your heroes are killers and you defend the indefensible. Those who go out with knives and guns to murder men, women, and children. Those who stab pregnant women. I get it, you have the viewpoint that Jews don’t have any right to live in our land and for the “crime” of living in the ancestral homeland of the Jewish people they are “scum”, “squatters” and deserve to be viciously murdered.

The fact is you are terrible antisemites, you condone the most evil crimes, and you seek to protect the most evil people on the planet.

“The fact is you are terrible antisemites, you condone the most evil crimes, and you seek to protect the most evil people on the planet.”

“Maxila”, did you just call the Palestinians “the most evil people on the planet”?

Just want to make sure, “MaxNarr”, because I consider it my sacred duty to make sure that nobody in the Mondo comment section says anything about Jews which is worse than what we say about anybody else!
Thank you for relieving me of an onerous and tedious commitment. It’s open season now, unlimber those vouchsafers and let fly!

Those who go out with knives and guns to murder men, women, and children” maxnurd

Maxi , in Irish folklore , it is said that the concept of a fair fight was sacrosanct.So much so that if the ” away Team” arrived early for the fight and the home team was not ready , the visitors waited until their foe was fully prepared. Ie , knives fully sharpened and guns loaded.

Israel should adopt this philosophy and instead of issuing knives and guns to the Palestinians , they should arm them with the most up to date high tech weapons.The Palestinians could then carry on a fair fight and practice some “Lawn mowing ” and then you can stop whining about knives and guns.After all , Zionists , (note , I did not say , “Jews ” )are such fair minded people .Right max.

I asked you for a link to back up your claim that the Jordanian occupation was illegal.

I also asked you if you would support a Palestinian Father carrying a weapon to defend the lives of his Family from marauding thieving squatter scum who burn people out of their homes and kill whole families.But no reply –as usual.Just accusations of antisemitism.

“Defending the indefensible” is what the GoI, AIPAC, Jstreet and the US Congress has been doing for decades. You are just a parrot.

I don’t condemn the Jews. You do that all by yourself when you conflate Jews with zionists and conflate gun-toting ZIONIST SETTLER THUGS with the rest of us.

Have you ever watched “The Gatekeepers” Maxx? Zionists all, but their final judgment was THE SETTLEMENTS/SETTLERS were the root of all evil here. If they can see it, why do you refuse too see what happened on this video? Is it a vision problem or are you so full of hate you can no longer see?

Those who stab pregnant women. I get it, you have the viewpoint that Jews don’t have any right to live in our land and for the “crime” of living in the ancestral homeland of the Jewish people they are “scum”, “squatters” and deserve to be viciously murdered.”

I guess that’s why you call yourself MaxxNarr – get it?

Middle East Policy Council

The Original “No”: Why the Arabs Rejected Zionism, and Why It Matters
by Natasha Gill

Dr. Gill is a research associate at Barnard College and a former professor of conflict studies at The New School University. She is the founder and director of TRACK4, which runs negotiation simulations for diplomats, mediators, journalists, policy makers, students and community leaders.
June 19, 2013

A viable peace process does not require either party to embrace or even recognize the legitimacy of the other’s narrative. It requires that both have an informed and non-reductionist understanding of what this narrative consists of, come to terms with the fact that it cannot be wished away, and recognize that elements of it will make their way to the negotiating table and have to be addressed.

What confusion would ensue all the world over if this principle on which the Jews base their “legitimate” claim were carried out in other parts of the world! What migrations of nations must follow! The Spaniards in Spain would have to make room for the Arabs and Moors who conquered and ruled their country for over 700 years…

— Palestine Arab Delegation, Observations on the High Commissioner’s Interim Report on the Civil Administration of Palestine during the period 1st July 1920 – 30th June 1921

The Palestinian Arabs said No to the idea that in the 20th century a people who last lived in Palestine in large numbers over 2000 years ago could claim, on the basis of a religious text, rights to the land where the current inhabitants had been living for a millennium and a half.

They did not base their rejection on a denial of Jewish historical and religious ties to the Holy Land. Rather, they said No to the idea that highly secularized Jews arriving from Europe, who seemed to abjure religious life, manners and practices, could use the Bible to support a political project of a Jewish state in an already populated and settled land.

Nor did they deny the suffering of the Jews, or the pogroms and persecution they were experiencing in Western and Eastern Europe at the time. On the contrary, many of the most vocal critics of Zionism were extremely aware of Jewish suffering, as they were unsettled by the impact it was having on the British support for the project of the Jewish National Home. What they said no to was the idea that the Jews’ humanitarian plight granted them special political and national rights in Palestine, and that those Jewish rights should trump Arab rights. The Arabs said No to the idea that they should pay the price for longstanding Christian persecution of the Jews, and they expressed deep resentment at the hypocrisy of the Europeans, who were promoting a home for the Jews in Palestine as they closed their own doors to the victims of Christian/European anti-Semitism.

There is nothing shocking or strange about Arabs considering Zionist Jews coming from Europe an “alien implant” in Palestine, and resenting that.2 The logic of most national and proto-national movements — with Zionism hardly an exception — is that outsiders are a threat, and the definition of both “outsiders” and “threat” are influenced by the shifting needs and interests of each movement in its defining moments. In response to Zionism, the Arabs pointed out that the laws of territorial possession were accepted worldwide: had they not been, the Arabs could reconquer and reclaim Spain, a country they reigned over for longer and more recently than the Jews did Palestine. In the view of the Palestinian Arabs, regardless of whether Jews were genuinely attached to or had a history in Palestine, the appeal to the Bible was not strong enough to overturn the rules of a modern, secular world order.

The Arabs and Palestinians still today are taken to task for not having shown enough compassion for Jewish suffering and welcomed them to take refuge in Palestine. But while many Jews can make an intuitive connection between the predicament they faced between the turn of the century and the 1940s and their need for a state, there is no reason that for other parties compassion for Jewish suffering would naturally translate this into an acceptance of Zionism, either then or now. This is especially so in the case of the Arabs in the early years of the conflict, who knew that Zionism would negatively affect their lives in the future.”

You’re right: It wasn’t casual. It was an entirely intentional execution, deliberately and efficiently carried out.

|| … The double standards on this website are amazing. … ||

You’re right: You Zio-supremacists seem to think that Jews are entitled to do unto others acts of injustice and immorality they would not have others do unto them.

|| … They time is OVER when Jewish blood is cheap. … ||

No blood – Jewish or non-Jewish – should be cheap. And yet you Zio-supremacists are doing everything in your power to undermine the rights and protections that every person – Jewish and non-Jewish – should be entitled to.

You’re a Jewish supremacist, so I understand why you hate non-Jews; but why on Earth do you hate Jews so much?!

“You’re a Jewish supremacist, so I understand why you hate non-Jews; but why on Earth do you hate Jews so much?! “

“eljay” when Jews were ’emancipated’, that is, became ordinary citizens of the countries they lived in, an entire cohort of Jews who mediated between Jews and the outside society, and the quasi-religious governmental structure of a separate society became redundant.
Nobody likes that. You tend to resent the people that did it to you.

Support Mondoweiss’s independent journalism today

Mondoweiss brings you the news that no one else will. Your tax-deductible donation enables us to deliver information, analysis and voices stifled elsewhere. Please give now to maintain and grow this unique resource.